TWENTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM. LORDS. SAT FIRST. THURSDAY, JULY 13, 1876. The Earl Howe, after the death of his Brother. TUESDAY, JULY 25. The Lord Hylton, after the death of his Father. COMMONS. NEW WRITS ISSUED. THURSDAY, JUNE 22, 1876.. For Birmingham, v. George Dixon, esquire, Chiltern Hundreds. THURSDAY, JUNE 29. For Worcester County (Western Division), v. William Edward Dowdeswell, esquire, Chiltern Hundreds. MONDAY, JULY 3. For Leitrim County, v. Major William Richard Ormsby Gore, now Baron Harlech, called up to the House of Peers. FRIDAY, JULY 7. For Chester County (Mid Division), v. Egerton Leigh, esquire, deceased. MONDAY, JULY 17. For Kent County (Eastern Division), v. Sir Wyndham Knatchbull, baronet, Chiltern Hundreds. TUESDAY, JULY 25. For New Shoreham, v. Sir Percy Burrell, baronet, deceased. NEW MEMBERS SWORN. FRIDAY, JULY 7, 1876. Pembroke County-James Bevan Bowen, esquire. MONDAY, JULY 10. Worcester County (Western Division)-Sir Edmund Anthony Harley Lechmere, baronet. WEDNESDAY, JULY 19. Chester County (Mid Division)-Piers Egerton Warburton, esquire. APPOINTED TO MEET 5 MARCH, 1874, AND THENCE CONTINUED TILL 8 FEBRUARY, 1876, IN THE THIRTY-NINTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA. FOURTH VOLUME OF THE SESSION. HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, 19th June, 1876. * adopted upon the estates held by the Duchy of Cornwall, the Charity Commissioners, and the Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital. THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading GORDON said, he thought the noble Burghs (Scotland) Gas Supply (124); Pre- Earl would see the propriety of amendvention of Crimes Act Amendment* (125); Local Government Board's Provisional Orders ing the Return moved for by omitting Confirmation (Bath, &c.)* (126), and referred the reference to the estates of the Duchy to the Examiners; Local Government Board's of Cornwall. It seemed to him that Provisional Orders Confirmation (Artizans and Labourers Dwellings) * [127], and referred to the Examiners. Second Reading-Burghs (Division into Wards) (Scotland) Amendment* (116). Report-Ecclesiastical Offices and Fees* (123). Third Reading Tramways Orders Confirmation (Bristol, &c.) * (60), and passed. AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS (ENGLAND) they had no more right to require a Return with reference to those estates than they had with reference to the private estates of any Member of that House. Therefore, he hoped his noble Friend would strike out that portion of his Motion. With regard to the Charity Commissioners, he had to say that they did not hold land, and, consequently, the portion of the noble Earl's Motion which referred to them was inapplicable. HE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN As to the Commissioners of Greenwich moved, That there be laid before Hospital, they were abolished by an the House a Return showing whether Act passed in the 28th and 29th of the the provisions of the Agricultural Hold-Queen-a fact of which he had supposed ings Act, 1875, have or have not been the noble Earl would have been aware, VOL. COXXX. [THIRD SERIES.] MOTION FOR A RETURN. B If the noble Earl substituted "Board | and they must work it out patiently, of Admiralty for "Commissioners of always recollecting that science and Greenwich Hospital," there would be practice were both required to guide no objection to the last part of his them. Motion. THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN agreed with the noble Viscount, rather than with the noble Duke, as to what had been said about the Duchy of Cornwall. He would amend his Motion in the way proposed. Motion amended, and agreed to. Return showing whether the provisions of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1875, have or have Board of Admiralty: Ordered to be laid before not been adopted upon the estates held by the the House.-(The Earl of Camperdown.) LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD'S PROVISIONAL A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to the Boroughs of Bath and Birmingham, the District of Brentford, the special Drainage District of Caistor Union, the District of Castleford, the Burgess Hill, the Rural Sanitary District of the Boroughs of Guildford, Hanley, Liverpool, Rochester, and Warwick, and the District of Worthing-Was presented by The Earl of JERSEY; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 126.) VISCOUNT PORTMAN said, that if the object of the noble Earl was to know the fact relative to the Duchy, and not to require a formal Return, he would give him the fact, and beg him to omit the Duchy of Cornwall from the Return. The noble Earl was verging on an inquiry into personal affairs-although he (Viscount Portman) must admit that the management of the Duchy was of public importance, inasmuch as good management averted requisition. for public money, while a bad system, such as existed in former reigns, was a public evil. The fact, then, was that as to the advice given by the Council of the Duchy to the Prince of Wales as to contracting out of the Act; more than two-thirds of the Duchy estate was on lease, and therefore out of the Act. The remainder was held on agreement until the terms could be arranged for leases. The Council had advised to contract out of the Act where intermixed lands were in question, because in respect of these it was of great importance that they should be unfettered. Once under the control of the Act, no one could escape it; but while out of it any one might contract into it wholly or in part, at any time. It should not be forgotten that Parliament had so little confidence in the provisions of the Act that it directed all owners and occupiers to decide within a given time whether to accept or to decline to accept the scheme; and no one who was responsible to successors could fail to decline while the data for valuations under the Act were so imperfect that only now were experiments about to be made to enable honest valuers to form a calculation of the value of unexhausted manure. The Duke of Bedford, with the wonted liberality of his family, had placed land and money at the disposal of eminent men MINUTES.]-SUPPLY-considered in Committee to try to form a basis for valuation; but he ventured to predict that the best we could hope for was a series of negative results. The House of Commons struck out of the Bill the only test of value which the noble Duke the President of the Council proposed-namely, the increased letting value of the farm. Parliament had put before them a scheme, The Duke of Richmond and Gordon LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD'S PROVISIONAL LABOURERS DWELLINGS) BILL [H.L.] A Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board relating to the Boroughs of Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, and Swansea-Was presented by The LORD PRESIDENT; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 127.) House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, 19th June, 1876. * * Resolution -ARMY PURCHASE ESTIMATE [June 16] reported. PUBLIC BILLS · Resolutions in Committee-Ordered-First Reading-Arklow Harbour Improvement [199]; Ardglass Harbour Improvement [200]. Ordered-First Reading-Dublin City* [201]. Second Reading-Elementary Education [155]; Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (Chapelen-le-Frith, &c.) * [195]; Oyster and Mussel Fisheries Order Confirmation* [196]. Second Reading-Referred to Select Committee Toll Bridges (River Thames) * [77]. Committee-Report-Waterford, New Ross, and Wexford Junction Railway (Sale) (re-comm.)* [198]. Third Reading-Army Corps Training [182]; Statute Law Revision (Substituted Enactments) [183]; Local Government Provisional Orders, Bristol, &c. (No. 6) * [147], and passed. IRELAND-KILBARRY MARSH. QUESTION. MR. RICHARD POWER asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, If he has any objection to lay upon the Table of the House, Copies of the Report of Inspector Hamilton upon the sanitary condition of Kilbarry Marsh, near the city of Waterford? SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in reply, said, he should have great pleasure in complying with the request of the hon. Member, if he would move for the Correspondence also which preceded the Report. has appointed an officiating clergyman to the district? MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, said, he believed this particular Order had not been registered; but it was true that the Bishop, with the concurrence of the Crown, had made the appointment referred to. FUGITIVE SLAVES-THE ADMIRALTY CIRCULARS.-QUESTION. of the Admiralty, Whether, considering the Report of the Royal Commission on Fugitive Slaves, it is intended to withdraw the second Admiralty Circular on the subject, and to issue fresh instruc MR. FORSYTH asked the First Lord tions based on the recommendations of the Royal Commission? MR. HUNT, in reply, said, the Report of the Royal Commission on Fugitive Slaves had not yet been circulated been so circulated and Members had hon. Members. When it had had sufficient time to consider its con among THE CHANNEL ISLANDS JERSEY- tents, Her Majesty's Government would ORDERS IN COUNCIL.-QUESTIONS. MR. LOCKE asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether an Order of Her Majesty in Council, and published in the "London Gazette," becomes Law in the Island of Jersey, although not registered by the Royal Court of Jersey;, if not, have the Royal Court the authority to delay registration of Orders in Council? MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, said, that an Order in Council published in The London Gazette did not become law in the Island of Jersey until it was registered. He understood that the Royal Court had power to suspend for a time the registration of Orders in Council, with a view of affording an opportunity for examining their contents, considering them, and of petitioning in respect of them if necessary; but in the event of declining to register the Queen had power to order registration to be made. MR. LOCKE asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the Order in Council dated 26th October 1875, and published in the "London Gazette," constituting the Consolidated Chapelry of Gouray, in the Island of Jersey, has come into operation; and whether the Crown, with the concurrence of the Bishop of the diocese, take an opportunity of stating what course they intended to pursue. SPAIN-THE CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 11-RELIGIOUS TOLERATION. QUESTION. MR. GRANT DUFF asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether recent legislation in Spain has prejudicially affected the position of persons dissenting from the established religion of that country; and, if so, to what extent ? MR. BOURKE: Sir, in asking the Question he has, I conclude my hon. Friend alludes to Article 11 of the proposed Constitution, which has not yet become law, but which we are informed was passed by the Senate last Friday. I think I can best answer the Question by reading the Article— "The nation undertakes to maintain the wor ship and ministers of the Catholic religion, which is that of the State. No one shall be molested (molestado) in the territory of Spain for his religious opinions, nor for the exercise of with the respect due to Christian morality. his particular worship, so long as it be consistent Nevertheless, no public ceremonies or manifestations other than those of the religion of the State will be permitted." The amount of religious liberty which this Article confers will to a great extent depend upon the interpretation which is |